Reihan offers an explanation for Brown’s seemingly contradictory stances on healthcare reform:
I believe, and I get the strong impression that Brown believes, that health reform is an issue that should be handled differently in different regions of the country. The Massachusetts reform model might prove to be a decent fit for Massachusetts — the jury is still out, and it’s a commonplace that the model is in desperate need to delivery-system reform. But perhaps Hawaii will want to experiment with a single-payer system and Texas will want to experiment with universal catastrophic coverage and Minnesota will choose something in between.
He also challenges my take on Republican nihilism:
[T]here are some aspects of the Brown campaign that are discouraging, including the fact that he doesn’t balance talk of tax cuts with serious talk of spending cuts — indeed, he is adamantly opposed to even very modest Medicare cuts. […] There are many, many ironies in the Brownthusiam, but the most notable is the fact that this suburban father with a rather blandly centrist voting record has become the target of apocalyptic rhetoric from both sides. Really, the question is whether or not he has decent judgment. His record suggests that he’s good at making fine distinctions and voting in a pragmatic, constituency-focused manner. I’d prefer a more cost-conscious legislator myself, but he certainly doesn’t come across as a nihilist bent on the destruction of government.
No, that’s just the agenda his election will empower and he will never resist. But one can only admire Reihan for his continuing attempt to find reason in what’s left of the GOP. If anyone really thinks that Brown’s opposition to the health insurance bill is a function of a deep reflection on federalism (where the GOP position is actually for buying insurance across state lines), he’s a more trusting fellow than I am.
(Photo: Darren McCollester/Getty.)
The Dish 